Military Review

Marine stories. Fight in the Bay of Biscay: Weather Against Barrels and Torpedoes

71
Indeed, a very interesting, albeit little-known battle took place on December 28, 1943 in the Bay of Biscay. Two British and 2 German ships converged in a very controversial battle.



Painting by Norman Wilkinson "The Battle of the Bay of Biscay"

A few words about the characters.

British light cruisers "Glasgow" and "Enterprise". "Glasgow" is the newest of the type "Town", "Enterprise" - blatantly old junk, launched in 1919 and entered service in 1926.

Marine stories. Fight in the Bay of Biscay: Weather Against Barrels and Torpedoes

Captain Charles Clarke (right) and Senior Assistant Commander Cromwell Lloyd-Davis, Captain of the cruiser "Glasgow".


Light cruiser "Glasgow"



Light cruiser "Enterprise"

From the German side, 5 Type 1936 destroyers and 6 Type 1939 destroyers took part. The latter were also called "Elbingas" after the shipyard where they were built.


Destroyer "Type 1936"



Destroyer "Type 1939"


And the main character, because of whom everything happened in general, the German blockade-breaker "Alsterufer". And although his participation in our stories more than episodic, everything actually started from this trough.

A few words about the so-called blockade breakers. Under this loud term, in general, ordinary cargo ships were hidden.



True, they came from countries with which Germany had good relations and they brought raw materials very valuable for the Reich: molybdenum, tungsten, rubber and other very useful materials that were not in the Reich.

Naturally, the British fleet, which declared the blockade, climbed out of its skin (torn to its flag) so that these breakers did not reach the ports. But this is a separate story altogether, so we will return to it another time.

So blockade breakers had to show miracles of resourcefulness, change flags and names in order to get closer to their ports. And then the Kriegsmarine was supposed to work, ensuring the escort of cargo ships to their ports exactly where the meeting with British ships was most realistic.

And the British, accordingly, very zealously searched for these transports and drowned them with great pleasure.

Therefore, when the Alsterufer came close to the shores of France, the interests of two parties clashed: the German, which wanted to conduct the transport to itself, and the British, which wanted to sink it.

A British air reconnaissance officer has located the Alsterufer and the countdown has begun for our event. Naturally, both sides sent their representatives, the British cruising patrol of two light cruisers, and the Germans - 11 destroyers and destroyers.

Actually, everyone was late. British aviation managed to sink the "Alsterufer" on December 27, 1943, and in principle, the efforts of the ship crews were wasted.


Photographs of the sinking of the Alsterufer


But in the Bay of Biscay that day there were two cruisers and eleven destroyers and destroyers. And December 28 became the day when the two detachments met, despite the fact that one of the detachments (German) was not particularly eager to fight, on the contrary, not finding the Alsterufer, the Germans were able to understand what was what and go on the opposite course, in Bordeaux and Brest.

So, let's go through the characters.

Britannia:

Light cruiser Glasgow. 12 152-mm guns, 8 102-mm guns, 6 torpedo tubes.

Light cruiser Enterprise. 5 guns 152 mm, 3 guns 102 mm, 12 torpedo tubes.

Germany:

Destroyer Type 1936A. 5 guns 150 mm, 8 torpedo tubes.

Destroyer "Type 1939". 4 105 mm guns and 6 torpedo tubes.

The armament layout was definitely not in favor of the British.
24 guns 150 mm from the Germans against 17 guns 152 mm from the British.
24 105-mm guns for the Germans versus 11 102-mm guns for the British.
76 German torpedoes against 14 British.

If you look at the numbers, the Germans had the opportunity to butcher the British cruiser easily and naturally with torpedoes alone. And in terms of artillery, the advantage was small, but the Germans had it.

However, the Bay of Biscay in December is not the Mediterranean. It's still the tip of the Atlantic Ocean. And here it is worth looking at a few more figures, namely the displacement.

"Glasgow" (like all "Southamptons") had a standard displacement of 9 tons.
The Enterprise had this figure of 7 tons.

The Type 1936A destroyers were larger than any classmate. Even closer to the leaders. And their standard displacement was 3 tons.

The Type 1939 destroyers were ordinary ships for this class with a displacement of 1 tons.

That is, we can immediately conclude that the British cruisers were more stable gun platforms, and in conditions of ocean waves they definitely had an advantage over German ships.


Torpedo boats T-25 and T-26 in the Bay of Biscay a day before their death


And it so happened that the radar operators on "Glasgow" in the afternoon (at 12-40, to be exact) found a detachment of German ships. And about 13-30 Kriegsmarine destroyers have already spotted visually.

The Germans marched in three wake columns. The left one consisted of Z-23 and Z-27, "Type 1936", the right column consisted of Z-32, Z-37 and Z-24. And in the center were T-22, T-23, T-24, T-25, T-26 and T-27, all "Type 1939".

It so happened that the battle had to be fought only with the larger Type 1936, since the excitement that arose in the bay did not allow the smaller destroyers. Waves flooded the towers of destroyers sitting low in the water, rangefinders, even the elementary loading of guns, which was manual on destroyers, turned into a serious task.

And the British had a radar on the Glasgow ...

Using radar data, "Glasgow" at 13-46 opened fire on the destroyers from a distance of about 10 miles. The fire was directed by the bow towers and was inaccurate. The Germans reduced the distance to 8 miles and also opened fire with guns, and the Z-23 also fired six torpedoes at the British.

The Germans fired well, the first volleys fell within a cable and a half from Glasgow. Plus, a radio-directed FW-200 Condor patrolman flew in and attacked Glasgow, but the British were firing very dense anti-aircraft fire and the bombs dropped by the Condor were very inaccurate.

In general, the Glasgow crew showed themselves just fine at the beginning of the battle. Having fought off the Condor, the British noticed the torpedoes and were able to dodge them.

Z-37 fired 4 torpedoes at the Enterprise, but the second cruiser was also able to dodge, although this had to break away from Glasgow.

We can say that the beginning remained with the Germans. They were able to separate the enemy cruisers, and the commander of the destroyer group Erdmenger decided to split the ships into two groups and take the British in "pincers".

The idea was good, which cannot be said about the execution.

The torpedo attack did not work at all, for a completely incomprehensible reason. The Germans fired only 11 torpedoes in addition to the top ten and that was it. Moreover, the torpedoes again passed the British ships.

Then Erdmenger made an amazing decision and gave the order to "wash away". The southern group, which consisted of Z-32, Z-37, Z-24, T-23, T-24 and T-27, was to begin a breakthrough to the east, and Erdmenger, who held the flag on Z-27, together with Z-23 , T-22, T-25 and T-26, turned north.

The British, assessing the situation with the help of radar, followed the northern group. The Glasgow commander, Captain Clarke, lay on a course parallel to the destroyers and opened fire.

First, the 152mm round hit the group leader, Z-27. Moreover, in the boiler room. The destroyer slowed down and turned west along with the Z-23 covering it.

Since all the 150-mm guns of the group were out of action, the Glasgow quite calmly staged a massacre against the destroyers, who could not oppose anything at all to the cruiser.

First, the T-25 received two rounds from Glasgow. Both got into the turbine compartments and the destroyer completely lost its course. The T-25 commander asked the T-22 to come up and take off the crew.

After some half an hour, the T-26 also received a shell in the boiler room. A fire started there and the T-26 also lost its speed.

The T-22 launched a torpedo attack, trying to drive away the Glasgow at least with this demonstration, but he himself was driven away by the Glasgow crews, which demonstrated accurate shooting in conditions of excitement. All 6 torpedoes from the T-22 passed the Glasgow. By the way, 25 torpedoes were also fired from the T-3, but with the same result.

Clarke made a wise decision, ordering the slower Enterprise to finish off the damaged destroyers, while he sent the Glasgow behind the Z-27.

This was very easy to do, fortunately, the Z-23 crew simply abandoned the damaged flagship and disappeared. But the radar "Glasgow" unmistakably found the Z-27 and from a distance of 8 cables (point-blank, if at sea) shot the destroyer. At 16:41 pm, one of the shells hit the ammunition cellar and the Z-27 exploded and sank. 220 people died with him.

The Enterprise's crew wasted no time either, and first found the immobilized T-26. Two torpedoes - and the destroyer sank to the bottom, taking with it 96 crew members.

After 15 minutes, the cruiser discovered a second destroyer, T-25, which also stood, losing its course. From a distance of 11 cables, the Enterprise opened fire with guns. The crew of the T-25 began to snap back from two 105-mm guns, the British decided not to get involved and sent the ship to the bottom with a torpedo. Minus another 85 German sailors.

The rest of the German ships safely left for the ports of France, except for the Z-32 and Z-37, which, after making sure that the British cruisers left, returned and began to rescue sailors from the sunk ships.

The results of the battle for the Germans are more than sad. 1 destroyer and 2 destroyers were sunk, 401 people died. British losses are more modest: 2 killed and 6 wounded from a single 150-mm shell that hit the cruiser Glasgow. The Enterprise's Canadian crew suffered no losses.

The stunning inaccuracy of the German sailors when firing torpedoes is surprising. Yes, the Canadians from the Enterprise were hit by three out of three torpedoes. Yes, they fired at stationary ships, but the fact that the Germans did not hit a single out of three dozen torpedoes fired also speaks volumes.

There are claims to the commander of a group of German ships.


Commander of a group of German destroyers Erdmenger


It's hard to say what the point was in a rather useless attack on cruisers by forces of only large destroyers. It was not possible to realize the main advantage in torpedoes, and as artillery platforms, larger cruisers were preferable.

Considering that literally the day before this defeat, and in fact only Glasgow fought, the Scharnhorst was sunk in the Arctic, the German fleet received two loud slaps from fleet British.

And the consequence of the defeat in the Bay of Biscay was the termination of attempts to deliver strategically important materials from the same Japan with the help of surface ships. In 1944, these responsibilities were assigned to the submarine fleet under the command of Karl Doenitz.

But this is a completely different story.

We can only pay our respects to the crew of the cruiser "Glasgow", which did not deal with statistics and counting of the enemy's barrels and torpedoes, but simply did his job.



And, note, he did it very efficiently.
Author:
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergey M. Karasev
    Sergey M. Karasev 15 February 2021 05: 48
    +17
    Well done, what else can you say!
    1. Destiny
      Destiny 15 February 2021 06: 26
      +16
      Indeed, well done.We can only pay our respects to the crew of the cruiser "Glasgow"
    2. Mister X
      Mister X 15 February 2021 08: 28
      +6
      blockade breakers had to show miracles of resourcefulness, change flags and names
      Author: Roman Skomorokhov

      hi
      It turns out that the movie "The Armory Baron" is based on real events
      In the film, the smuggler changed the ship's name from Kristol to Kono and the flag to Dutch.



    3. yehat2
      yehat2 15 February 2021 11: 33
      +9
      a strange description of the balance of power.
      firstly, the caliber, the protection of the cruisers and the best fire adjustment systems were on the British side. The Germans, in principle, had a chance only for torpedoes.
      And secondly, with such a sparse formation, it was difficult to expect to get into very mobile light cruisers that were awaiting an attack. In my opinion, the Germans should have tried, under the cover of weather and smoke, to go out in one single torpedo attack and quickly roll away. But with such excitement, it is quite possible that they could not escape - seaworthiness affected.
      1. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav 15 February 2021 20: 35
        +1
        Comrade Xie, did you maneuver with 8 points? this is about moving targets, but I think your second conclusion is correct, only a torpedo attack with all units simultaneously
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 15 February 2021 21: 23
          +1
          at 8 points, everyone is wearing life jackets, and not maneuvering or fighting.
    4. TermNachTer
      TermNachTer 15 February 2021 13: 33
      +3
      Rather, the commander of a German detachment, not a very smart person. He started from Spain, then he was in Norway, he had to understand that his chances are practically "zero", unless the Britons are very wrong about something or some happy coincidence of circumstances. He had the opportunity to escape, but he himself died and killed 400 people.
  2. Catfish
    Catfish 15 February 2021 05: 59
    +9
    A few words about the so-called blockade breakers. Under this loud term, in general, ordinary cargo ships were hidden.

    Breaker crew member's badge.

    Destroyer crew badge.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 15 February 2021 06: 20
      +15
      The signs are beautiful, the results are dull.
  3. Koval Sergey
    Koval Sergey 15 February 2021 06: 09
    +25
    Thanks for the short History lesson. It was interesting good
  4. Alexey Koshkarov
    Alexey Koshkarov 15 February 2021 07: 53
    +8
    The article is interesting. Moreover, the other day I myself recalled this fight. Only in the photo the cruisers are confused. And the destroyers too.
  5. Alexey Koshkarov
    Alexey Koshkarov 15 February 2021 07: 56
    +8
    Most Type 39 destroyers had a bow turret with two six-inch guns, while the Enterprise had a two-tube
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 15 February 2021 10: 00
      +4


      Are you sure.

      I also doubt the author's calculations regarding the number of guns on both sides.

      HMS Enterprise had 7 152mm guns, not 5!

      Likewise, adding up the number of 150mm guns on German destroyers in 1936 gives a strange figure.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 February 2021 14: 56
        +1
        Quote: Constanty
        I also doubt the author's calculations regarding the number of guns on both sides.
        HMS Enterprise had 7 152mm guns, not 5!

        Most likely, the author took the number 6 "on the Enterprise" after the modernization of March 1941 - then a pair of 6 "was exchanged for a quadruple" pom-pom ". But already during the modernization of 1943, the removed pair of six-inch shoes returned to their place.
        1. Constanty
          Constanty 15 February 2021 15: 09
          0
          Exactly - in October 1943, two 152-mm guns were reinstalled.
          In fact, this could be the cause of the author's mistake, but the described battle took place two months later.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 15 February 2021 18: 08
            +1
            Quote: Constanty
            In fact, this could be the cause of the author's mistake, but the described battle took place two months later.

            Well, weapons exchanged for air defense usually do not return back. smile This "Enterprise" was lucky - not only did they return two 1943s in 6, they also strengthened their air defense for the second time (they replaced the single-barreled pom-poms with the second "quad", and the single-barreled Erlikons with six paired ones).
    2. sibiryouk
      sibiryouk 15 February 2021 15: 48
      0
      In my reference book Balakin, Dashyan and Patyanin - Enterprise was photographed and drawn in a sketch with 3 pipes for 1939. In the description, 7x152mm guns are indicated for Emerald-50, and 5 guns for Entenprize.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 15 February 2021 19: 04
        0
        As the honorary Alexei wrote, since March 1941, HMS Enterprise temporarily lost two single guns. Possible printed imp - HMS Enterprise in 1939 had guns in the configuration 1xII 152 mm and 5xI 152 mm. Maybe this is the mistake
  6. Avior
    Avior 15 February 2021 08: 27
    +9
    Well, the battle is a visual illustration for those who like to compare purely in terms of the number of weapons and do not take into account other features.
    The German destroyers in the photo, by the way, also clearly see the radar antenna.
  7. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 15 February 2021 09: 36
    -9
    The small-britters won the battle purely at the expense of the chutzpah, as with the Scharnhorst.
    But when there was an enemy who did not react to it, they raked it, as in the battle at Coronel or with formation Z.
  8. Niko
    Niko 15 February 2021 10: 11
    +4
    Oh, Andrei from the glorious city of Chelyabinsk, where are you? Every time something new appears in the Fleet section, I open it with hope ... and almost every time this is THIS .... reprints of the "pioneer truth" or "fire" level. Sad
  9. Constanty
    Constanty 15 February 2021 10: 20
    +5
    The armament layout was definitely not in favor of the British.
    24 guns 150 mm from the Germans against 17 guns 152 mm from the British.


    "Z23" - 4x150mm,
    "Z24" - 4 x 150mm,
    "Z27" - 4x150mm,
    "Z32" - 5x150mm,
    "Z37" - 5x150mm
    together 22 guns 150 mm from the Germans

    HMS "Glasgow" 12 x 152mm, HMS Enterprise 7x152mm - together 19 guns 152 mm British
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 15 February 2021 11: 38
      +9
      you can't just count the trunks. The weight of the projectile is one and a half times more
      in addition, their turret guns were faster and provided better fire control and stabilization. Personally, I estimate it as an almost two-fold superiority in firepower over the British, with a significant advantage in survivability.
      in addition, it is worth considering the words of Tirpitz that the concentration of power also gives an advantage.
      In general, the British were many times stronger, if you do not take into account the torpedoes.
      1. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 15 February 2021 12: 10
        +2
        And there is. As far as I remember, the Germans put lightweight 6 "guns on the destroyers. There the shells are not the same, and the ballistics are rather weak.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 15 February 2021 20: 26
          +3
          Quote: Saxahorse
          There, and the shells are not the same, and the ballistics is rather weak.

          Shells "those", the powder charge is only half a kilo lighter.
      2. Constanty
        Constanty 15 February 2021 12: 32
        +4
        I completely agree (plus larger ships as more stable artillery platforms), but if anyone wants to count, let it be more accurate.
        Here the author did not show accuracy, and ignorance of the weapons of the HMS Enterprise (and the data, probably for the "Emerald" type) is a very shameful mistake.
      3. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig 15 February 2021 20: 23
        +1
        Quote: yehat2
        you can't just count the trunks. The weight of the projectile is one and a half times more

        Why do you think so?
        British 6 "CPBC - 50,8 kg
        German 15 cm Spgr. L / 4,4 Bdz (m.Hb) - 45,5 kg
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 15 February 2021 21: 52
          +4
          the guns were 152 mm / 50, not 152 mm / 45
          and shells from the 11th carrot must be taken into account by the impudent, and this is all one weight 45.3,
          armor-piercing with a charge of 6 kg.
          And the Germans had 15 cm TbtsK C / 36 and a weight of 45.5, but the explosive was 1,32 kg
          moreover, even high-explosive shells contained 3.3-3.9 explosives, depending on the type.
          so I compared them - the difference is 2 times.
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig 15 February 2021 22: 02
            0
            Quote: yehat2
            the guns were 152 mm / 50, not 152 mm / 45
            and shells from the 11th carrot must be taken into account by the impudent, and this is all one weight 45.3,
            armor-piercing with a charge of 6 kg.
            And the Germans had 15 cm TbtsK C / 36 and a weight of 45.5, but the explosive was 1,32 kg
            moreover, even high-explosive shells contained 3.3-3.9 explosives, depending on the type.
            so I compared them - the difference is 2 times.

            Comrade, can you only state this in a more understandable language?
      4. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav 15 February 2021 20: 27
        0
        this japa took into account torpedoes, but the Germans are not very
  10. Engineer
    Engineer 15 February 2021 11: 49
    +1
    Even when I read about this battle, Morozov got the impression that Erdmenger's attack saved the group from even more heavy losses by letting the rest leave. Morozov himself did not make such a conclusion, but based on the context it can be assumed.
  11. Alex013
    Alex013 15 February 2021 12: 32
    +5
    By the way, just two months before this event, five German destroyers from this group sank the cruiser "Charybdis" and the destroyer "Limburn". Fight in the English Channel ... fate
  12. Engineer
    Engineer 15 February 2021 12: 38
    +2
    In general, the light forces of the Germans successfully used torpedoes, sometimes achieving successes against the superior forces of the British. For example, 2 months before this collision, Kolauf harshly put the British in a night battle in the English Channel. This battle did not grow together. Every day is not Sunday. But in general, everything looks as if the Germans were superior to the British in torpedo firing. What is the epic shooting of the British with torpedoes in the collision at Le Set-Ile in 1944
  13. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 15 February 2021 13: 11
    +3
    The cruisers, in addition to their displacement and radars, had another very important advantage - their armor. German destroyers and non-armored ships.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 15 February 2021 13: 43
      +3
      Quote: Kostadinov
      The cruisers, in addition to their displacement and radars, had another very important advantage - their armor.

      Pistol ranges by the standards of the fleet. There, the armor of the same "Glasgow", in theory, would not really keep anything six-inch even from destroyers. But they still had to hit, with which there was a problem.
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig 15 February 2021 20: 32
        +1
        Quote: Kuroneko
        There, the armor of the same "Glasgow", in theory, would not really keep anything six-inch even from destroyers.

        There were no armor-piercing destroyers in the BC.
        I have no data on semi-armor-piercing, but 150-mm land mines with head fuses were held even by homogeneous 110 mm thick armor.
  14. Klonser
    Klonser 15 February 2021 13: 19
    +5
    In a similar battle, British destroyers sank the heavy cruiser Haguro. Maybe it's not about the stability of the gun platform and the number of guns and torpedoes, but about the fact that the German sailors' hands were growing from the wrong place. The British on destroyers throughout the war against German surface ships acted more skillfully. And if the opponents are reversed, it is not a fact that they would not have sunk the cruiser.
    1. Usher
      Usher 15 February 2021 21: 31
      -1
      Quote: Klonser
      In a similar battle, British destroyers sank the heavy cruiser Haguro. Maybe it's not about the stability of the gun platform and the number of guns and torpedoes, but about the fact that the German sailors' hands were growing from the wrong place. The British on destroyers throughout the war against German surface ships acted more skillfully. And if the opponents are reversed, it is not a fact that they would not have sunk the cruiser.

      The fight was different.
  15. Black lotos
    Black lotos 15 February 2021 14: 31
    +1
    The weather always interferes with the quantity and quality of trunks.
    So to say "random factor"
  16. iouris
    iouris 15 February 2021 15: 18
    -3
    What "claims" can the author of the text have against the commander of German ships? the British are our allies in WWII.
  17. mmaxx
    mmaxx 15 February 2021 15: 43
    +6
    In the conditions of excitement, it is no wonder that the torpedoes did not help the Germans. And in terms of artillery, the cruiser is still more preferable. The size is larger, the guns are higher and in the towers (Glasgow).
    And the British are very evil warriors at sea. They could spit blood. Where the Germans merged, they were on the rampage to the last. Taking off my hat.
  18. NF68
    NF68 15 February 2021 17: 22
    +1
    The Type 1936A destroyers were larger than any classmate. Even closer to the leaders. And their standard displacement was 3 tons.


    Not a standard displacement of 3600 tons, but a full one. The standard is almost 1000 tons less.

    It's hard to say what the point was in a rather useless attack on cruisers by forces of only large destroyers. It was not possible to realize the main advantage in torpedoes, and as artillery platforms, larger cruisers were preferable.


    The Germans certainly did not have cruisers there. So they used what was available.
  19. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 15 February 2021 17: 46
    +1
    Quote: Kuroneko
    Quote: Kostadinov
    The cruisers, in addition to their displacement and radars, had another very important advantage - their armor.

    Pistol ranges by the standards of the fleet. There, the armor of the same "Glasgow", in theory, would not really keep anything six-inch even from destroyers. But they still had to hit, with which there was a problem.

    The main battle distance is 6-8 miles (10-14 kilometers), while Glasgow has 114 mm. belt and 50 mm deck. At these combat distances, German armor-piercing of 150 mm in principle does not pass through the belt or deck of Glasgow.
    And the wounded ones who were finishing off at pistol distances, the Enterprise could no longer shoot.
    1. Snail N9
      Snail N9 15 February 2021 18: 24
      +4
      A pebble in the garden is that now, he wants to "protect" and "destroy" everything with small corvettes and boats, such as large destroyer ships and frigates ... wink
      1. Usher
        Usher 15 February 2021 21: 20
        0
        Quote: Snail N9
        A pebble in the garden is that now, he wants to "protect" and "destroy" everything with small corvettes and boats, such as large destroyer ships and frigates ... wink

        Now the main weapon is missiles. And where to start it is not so important.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 18 February 2021 13: 21
          0
          A large ship is ALWAYS, and especially in rough conditions, is in more preferable conditions for the use of weapons.
          1. Usher
            Usher 18 February 2021 23: 07
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            A large ship is ALWAYS, and especially in rough conditions, is in more preferable conditions for the use of weapons.

            this is understandable, but modern missile weapons have ironed out this difference.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 19 February 2021 01: 37
              0
              Not at all smoothed out. A large ship can shoot down missiles. Little is almost none. And the excitement both influenced and influences.
              For example, the Americans in the Persian Gulf.
              1. Usher
                Usher 19 February 2021 23: 49
                0
                Quote: mmaxx
                Not at all smoothed out. A large ship can shoot down missiles. Little is almost none. And the excitement both influenced and influences.
                For example, the Americans in the Persian Gulf.

                It's about offensive weapons, not defense. Can't shoot down, no one in real combat shot down anti-ship missiles. But now light ships can also strike, with the same efficiency.
                1. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 20 February 2021 15: 48
                  0
                  In 1988 in the Persian Gulf. The Americans repulsed the attack without any problems and then destroyed the Iranian ship. There was an advantage in forces, no question. But 1 on 1 would be exactly the same. A large ship has more means and defense and protection, and, in general, everything.
                  Those events also concern opponents of aircraft carriers laughing
                  1. Usher
                    Usher 20 February 2021 22: 51
                    0
                    Directly phalanxes shot down the anti-ship missiles? More details?
                    1. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 21 February 2021 05: 09
                      0
                      EW.
                      Yes, at least go to Wikipedia. You can't find it here. I can't retell
                  2. Usher
                    Usher 20 February 2021 23: 04
                    0
                    Quote: mmaxx
                    In 1988 in the Persian Gulf. The Americans repulsed the attack without any problems and then destroyed the Iranian ship. There was an advantage in forces, no question. But 1 on 1 would be exactly the same. A large ship has more means and defense and protection, and, in general, everything.
                    Those events also concern opponents of aircraft carriers laughing

                    If you're talking about Praying Mantis, where are the missile shootings? During the incident, no missiles were shot down. The corvette was sunk by bombs. And the corvettes did not have a full-fledged ZAK or SAM. That the Americans, that the Iranians. And the corvettes did not have a full-fledged ZAK or SAM. Which just proves that anti-ship missiles have smoothed out the difference between the sizes of ships.
                    1. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 21 February 2021 05: 12
                      0
                      The corvette was sunk by Air-to-Air missiles. The other ship was made by aviation. And light. The point is that a big ship in such a situation snarls like a heavyweight boxer against a teenager. The teenager has a chance, but ... If from the back and a knife in the side.
                      And the missile attack was repulsed. What's the difference how? On a large ship, both electronic warfare and anti-aircraft guided missiles, and FOR - everything is in abundance. And on small - they put an anti-ship missile - there is not enough for missiles, well, etc.
                      Why, when evaluating the effectiveness of a weapon, do you need to hit the forehead with the Phalanx? Mission accomplished? => winners are not judged.
                    2. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 21 February 2021 05: 27
                      0
                      The point is that on a large ship the conditions for the use of weapons and the very quality of weapons are much higher than on a small one. And it doesn't depend on the era. Not from artillery, not from anti-ship missiles and even aviation.
                      And then: they sank the corvette, because it did not have a ZA and an air defense system. And therefore it was not that he is small. "Harpoons" were screwed into it, they also thought that they would sink anyone, but for the rest there was no space or displacement left.
                    3. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 21 February 2021 05: 32
                      0
                      One comment disappeared. And he was about the fact that it makes no difference how the attack was repulsed. The big ship has everything: electronic warfare, air defense missile systems and ZA. If you have completed the task, then what else do you need?
                      1. Usher
                        Usher 22 February 2021 13: 10
                        0
                        Quote: mmaxx
                        One comment disappeared. And he was about the fact that it makes no difference how the attack was repulsed. The big ship has everything: electronic warfare, air defense missile systems and ZA. If you have completed the task, then what else do you need?

                        in that a small ship can also carry out a missile strike. Have you made some kind of water. I said that in the offensive capabilities, the missiles smoothed out the capabilities.
                      2. mmaxx
                        mmaxx 22 February 2021 16: 46
                        -1
                        Well, so how did the shock capabilities equalize in the mentioned case? No way. And in other cases it will be almost the same. This must be ensured by tactics and superiority in numbers. And it is not known what will happen.
                        Although already offtopic for a long time. And I will not insist on my own.
                      3. Usher
                        Usher 22 February 2021 18: 31
                        0
                        Quote: mmaxx
                        Well, so how did the shock capabilities equalize in the mentioned case? No way. And in other cases it will be almost the same. This must be ensured by tactics and superiority in numbers. And it is not known what will happen.
                        Although already offtopic for a long time. And I will not insist on my own.

                        compared with 30-40 years. equalized
  • yehat2
    yehat2 16 February 2021 02: 59
    +2
    the British gunners were protected by the armor of the towers, there was constructive and proper armor, and the Germans had guns with shields. those. almost any land mine will hit and
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 15 February 2021 18: 54
    +1
    It was interesting to return to the history of the real sea battle of the BNK. The Soviet Navy practically did not have a chance to participate in such collisions of the KR-EM.
    1. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav 15 February 2021 20: 21
      0
      there was one attack by the em of the northern fleet on a German convoy where there was not even an enemy em and it all ended shamefully
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 16 February 2021 10: 33
        +2
        In the Baltic in 1941 there was a battle between two "seven-U", "Novik" and SKR with a floating base and a pair of TSCs. The result, alas, is traditional - the Germans left, ours nearly lost one of the "sevens" (hit in the stern, a mine caught fire). Along the way, the Germans tore down a mine setting - for after the ignition of one mine, the "seven" dropped all the mines.
        It is unknown what Kapdva Abashvili was thinking when ordering an EM loaded with mines to engage a pair of destroyers and an MZ breaker (the results of target identification from our side). Moreover, the second "seven", on which he was, did not carry mines and was intended specifically to cover the setting.
  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 15 February 2021 20: 17
    0
    as always, the German commanders of the formations acted very sluggishly in almost all battles with the royal navy, a fan torpedo attack from close range would have ensured victory for the Germans, the German 150 mm towers on the em were worse than the standard 127 mm gun mounts, in fresh weather their electric drives were flooded and out of order , but the horses of the project 1936 are excellent ships
    1. dmmyak40
      dmmyak40 15 February 2021 22: 56
      0
      Fan-shaped? Do you mean "star" torpedo attack? I read somewhere that according to the pre-war theoretical layouts it was impossible to avoid getting hit.
    2. the Urals
      the Urals 17 February 2021 16: 20
      0
      So I think the same. Regardless of the possible losses, an attack from close range would surely bring victory and there would be fewer losses (possibly). Otherwise, it was impossible to use the advantage in torpedoes, or just run away !?
  • wlkw
    wlkw 15 February 2021 21: 09
    0
    I read something about the German fleet (surface) and somehow they were all sad. Either they did not know how to fight, like sailors, or from the very beginning the balance of forces of the fleets was not in their favor, in life.
    I don't know .. I'm not special.
  • Usher
    Usher 15 February 2021 21: 19
    0
    The destroyers in the stormy sea could not break away from their opponents. Because of this, I had to take a fight.
  • Unknown
    Unknown 16 February 2021 05: 35
    +1
    The Kriegsmarine submarines were also involved in rescuing the crews from the sunken destroyers and destroyers, it is interestingly written about this in the book "Steel ship, iron crew" by Gebler Hans.
  • Private SA
    Private SA 17 February 2021 08: 37
    0
    Radars. Target detection radar on the mast. Two team
    weapons control post on cruisers? What's in German
    destroyers? Detection range? Details?
    An analogue of the New Year's battle and the sinking of the Kriegsmarine destroyers in
    fiorda Narvik - morale, and orders from the leadership ...
  • Private SA
    Private SA 17 February 2021 08: 48
    0
    Quote: dmmyak40
    Fan-shaped? Do you mean "star" torpedo attack? I read somewhere that according to the pre-war theoretical layouts it was impossible to avoid getting hit.

    Here "Repals" and "Prince of Wales", as well as "Yamato" and "Musashi" did not twist.